Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing the Flying Earwig Hawaiian Damselfly and Pacific Hawaiian Damselfly As Endangered Throughout Their Ranges, 35990-36012 [2010-15237]

Agencies

• Fish and Wildlife Service
• DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 121 (Thursday, June 24, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 35990-36012]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-15237]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2009-0036]
[MO 92210-0-0008]
RIN 1018-AV47


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing the Flying 
Earwig Hawaiian Damselfly and Pacific Hawaiian Damselfly As Endangered 
Throughout Their Ranges

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), determine 
endangered status under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended 
(Act), for two species of Hawaiian damselflies, the flying earwig 
Hawaiian damselfly (Megalagrion nesiotes) on the island of Maui and the 
Pacific Hawaiian damselfly (M. pacificum) on the islands of Hawaii, 
Maui, and Molokai. This final rule implements the Federal protections 
provided by the Act for these species. We also determine that critical 
habitat for these two Hawaiian damselflies is prudent, but not 
determinable at this time.

DATES: This rule becomes effective July 26, 2010.

ADDRESSES: This final rule is available on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov and https://www.fws.gov/pacificislands. Comments and 
materials received, as well as supporting documentation used in the 
preparation of this rule, will be available for public inspection, by 
appointment, during normal business hours at: U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office, 300 Ala Moana 
Boulevard, Room 3-122, Box 50088, Honolulu, HI 96850; telephone, 808-
792-9400; facsimile, 808-792-9581.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Loyal Mehrhoff, Field Supervisor, 
Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES). If you use a 
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal 
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Damselflies are insects in the order Odonata, and are close 
relatives of dragonflies, which they resemble in appearance. 
Damselflies, however, are slender-bodied and fold their wings parallel 
to the body while at rest, which readily distinguishes them from their 
dragonfly relatives, which hold their wings out perpendicular to the 
body while not in flight.
    The flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly and the Pacific Hawaiian 
damselfly are unique, endemic insects found only in the Hawaiian 
Islands. Historically found on the islands of Hawaii and Maui, the 
flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly has not been seen on the island of 
Hawaii for over 80 years. Currently, the species is known only from one 
location on Maui. The Pacific Hawaiian damselfly was historically found 
on all of the main Hawaiian Islands except Kahoolawe and Niihau. 
Currently, the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly is known only from the 
islands of Hawaii, Maui and Molokai.
    The Hawaiian Islands are well known for several spectacular 
evolutionary radiations (the rapid evolution of new species from a 
single ancestral type, as a result of adaptation and divergence in 
response to new ecological conditions) resulting in unique insect fauna 
found nowhere else in the world. One such group, which began its 
evolution perhaps as long as 10 million years ago (Jordan et al. 2003, 
p. 89), is the narrow-winged Hawaiian damselfly genus Megalagrion. This 
genus appears to be most closely related to species of Pseudagrion 
elsewhere in the Indo-Pacific (Zimmerman 1948a, pp. 341, 345). The 
Megalagrion species of the Hawaiian Islands have evolved to occupy as 
many larval breeding niches (different adaptations and ecological 
conditions for breeding and development of larvae, including chemical, 
physical, spatial, and temporal factors) as all the rest of the world's 
damselfly species combined, and in terms of the number of insular-
endemic (native to only one island) species, are exceeded only by the 
radiation of damselfly species of Fiji in the Pacific (Jordan et al. 
2003, p. 91).
    Native Hawaiians apparently did not differentiate the various 
species, but referred to the native damselflies (and dragonflies) 
collectively as ``pinao,'' and to the red-colored damselflies 
specifically as ``pinao ula.'' There has been no traditional European 
use of a common name for species in the genus Megalagrion. In his 1994 
taxonomic review of the candidate species of insects of the Hawaiian 
Islands, Nishida (1994, pp. 4-7) proposed the name ``Hawaiian 
damselflies'' as the common name for species in the genus Megalagrion. 
Because this name reflects the restricted distribution of these insects 
and is nontechnical, the common name ``Hawaiian damselflies'' is 
adopted for general use here, and we use the common names flying earwig 
Hawaiian damselfly and Pacific Hawaiian damselfly to identify the two 
species addressed in this final rule.
    The general biology of Hawaiian damselflies is typical of other 
narrow-winged damselflies (Polhemus and Asquith 1996, pp. 2-7). The 
males of most species are territorial, guarding areas of habitat where 
females lay eggs (Moore 1983a, p. 89). During copulation, and often 
while the female lays eggs, the male grasps the female behind the head 
with terminal abdominal appendages to guard the female against rival 
males; thus males and females are frequently seen flying in tandem.
    Female damselflies lay eggs in submerged aquatic vegetation or in 
mats of moss or algae on submerged rocks, and hatching occurs in about 
10 days (Williams 1936, pp. 303, 306, 318; Evenhuis et al. 1995, p. 
18). In most species of Hawaiian damselflies, the immature larval 
stages (naiads) are aquatic, breathing through three flattened 
abdominal gills, and are predaceous, feeding on small aquatic

[[Page 35991]]

invertebrates or fish (Williams 1936, p. 303). Naiads may take up to 4 
months to mature (Williams 1936, p. 309), after which they crawl out of 
the water onto rocks or vegetation to molt into winged adults, 
typically remaining close to the aquatic habitat from which they 
emerged. The Pacific Hawaiian damselfly exhibits this typical aquatic 
life history.
    In contrast, the naiads of a few species of Hawaiian damselflies 
are terrestrial or semiterrestrial, living on wet rock faces or in damp 
terrestrial conditions, inhabiting wet leaf litter or moist leaf axils 
(the angled juncture of the leaf and stem) of native plants up to 
several feet above ground (Zimmerman 1970, p. 33; Simon et al. 1984, p. 
13; Polhemus and Asquith 1996, p. 17). The naiads of these terrestrial 
and semiterrestrial species have evolved short, thick, hairy gills and 
in many species are unable to swim (Polhemus and Asquith 1996, p. 75). 
The flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly is believed to exhibit this 
terrestrial or semiterrestrial naiad life history.
    The Hawaiian damselflies are represented by 23 species and 5 
subspecies, and are currently found on 6 of the Hawaiian Islands 
(Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, Maui, Lanai, and Hawaii). There are more species 
of Megalagrion on the geologically older islands (12 species on Kauai) 
than on the geologically youngest island (8 species on Hawaii), and 
there are more single-island endemic species on the older islands (10 
on Kauai) than on the youngest island (none on Hawaii) (Jordan et al. 
2003, p. 91). Historically, Megalagrion damselflies were among the most 
common and conspicuous native Hawaiian insects. Some species commonly 
inhabited water gardens in residential areas, artificial reservoirs, 
and watercress farms, and were even abundant in the city of Honolulu, 
as noted by early collectors of this group (Perkins 1899, p. 76; 
Perkins 1913, p. clxxviii; Williams 1936, p. 304).
    Beginning with the extensive stream and wetland conversion, 
alteration, and modification, and degradation of native forests through 
the 20th century, Hawaii's native damselflies, including the two 
species that are the subject of this final listing action, experienced 
a tremendous reduction in available habitat. In addition, predation by 
a number of nonnative species that have been both intentionally and, in 
some cases, inadvertently introduced into the Hawaiian Islands is a 
significant and ongoing threat to all native Hawaiian damselflies.

Previous Federal Actions

    Both the flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly and the Pacific Hawaiian 
damselfly were first designated as candidate species on May 22, 1984 
(49 FR 21664). Candidate species are those taxa for which the Service 
has sufficient information on their biological status and threats to 
propose them for listing under the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), but 
for which the development of a listing regulation has been precluded by 
other higher-priority listing activities. The flying earwig Hawaiian 
damselfly was removed from the candidate list on November 21, 1991 (56 
FR 58804), whereas the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly retained its status 
as a candidate species. On November 15, 1994 (59 FR 58982), the flying 
earwig Hawaiian damselfly was added back onto the candidate list. In 
the Candidate Notice of Review (CNOR) published on February 28, 1996 
(61 FR 7595), we announced a revised list of plant and animal taxa that 
we regarded as candidates for possible addition to the Lists of 
Threatened and Endangered Wildlife and Plants. This revision also 
included a new ranking system, whereby each candidate species was 
assigned a Listing Priority Number (LPN) from 1 to 12. Both the flying 
earwig Hawaiian damselfly and the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly were 
assigned an LPN of 2 on February 28, 1996 (61 FR 7595).
    On May 4, 2004, the Center for Biological Diversity petitioned the 
Secretary of the Interior to list 225 species of plants and animals 
that were already candidates, including these two Hawaiian damselfly 
species, as endangered or threatened under the provisions of the Act. 
In our annual CNOR, dated May 11, 2005 (70 FR 24870), we retained a 
listing priority number of 2 for both of these species in accordance 
with our listing priority guidance published on September 21, 1983 (48 
FR 43098). A listing priority number of 2 reflects threats that are 
both imminent and high in magnitude, as well as the taxonomic 
classification of each of these two Hawaiian damselflies as distinct 
species. At the time, we determined that publication of a proposed rule 
to list these species was precluded by our work on higher priority 
listing actions. Since then, we have published our annual findings on 
the May 4, 2004, petition (including our findings on these two 
candidate species) in the CNORs dated September 12, 2006 (71 FR 53756), 
December 6, 2007 (72 FR 69034), and December 10, 2008 (73 FR 75176).
    In fiscal year 2007, we determined that funding was available to 
initiate work on listing determinations for these two species. On July 
8, 2009, we published a proposed rule to list the flying earwig 
Hawaiian damselfly and the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly as endangered (74 
FR 32490). We solicited data and comments from the public on the 
proposed rule for 60 days, ending September 8, 2009. To allow the 
public and interested parties additional time to submit comments on the 
proposed rule, we reopened the comment period on November 19, 2009 (74 
FR 59956), and accepted comments until December 21, 2009.

Species Information

Flying Earwig Hawaiian Damselfly
    The flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly was first described from 
specimens collected in the 1890s in Puna on Hawaii Island by R.C.L. 
Perkins (1899, p. 72). Kennedy (1934, pp. 343-345) described what was 
believed at the time to be a new species of damselfly based on 
specimens from Maui; these were later determined to be synonymous with 
the specimens collected by Perkins. The flying earwig Hawaiian 
damselfly is a comparatively large and elongated species. The males are 
blue and black in color and exhibit distinctive, greatly enlarged, 
pincer-like cerci (paired appendages on the rearmost segment of the 
abdomen used to clasp the female during mating). It is for the males' 
elongated abdominal appendages and their resemblance to those found on 
earwigs (order Dermaptera) that the species is named. Females are 
predominantly brownish in color. The adults measure from 1.8 to 1.9 
inches (in) (46 to 50 millimeters (mm)) in length and have a wingspan 
of 1.9 to 2.1 in (50 to 53 mm). The wings of both sexes are clear 
except for the tips, which are narrowly darkened along the front 
margins. Naiads of this species have never been collected or found 
(Polhemus and Asquith 1996, p. 69), but they are believed to be 
terrestrial or semiterrestrial in habit (Kennedy 1934, p. 345; Preston 
2007a).
    The biology of the flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly is not well 
understood, and it is unknown if this species is more likely to be 
associated with standing water or flowing water (Kennedy 1934, p. 345; 
Polhemus 1994, p. 40). The only confirmed population found in the last 
6 years occurs along a single East Maui stream and the adjacent steep, 
moist, riparian talus slope (a slope formed by an accumulation of rock 
debris), which is densely covered with Dicranopteris

[[Page 35992]]

linearis (uluhe), a native fern. Adults of the flying earwig Hawaiian 
damselfly have been observed to perch on vegetation and boulders, and 
to fly slowly for short distances above this particular stream within 
the one known remaining habitat site. When disturbed, the adults fly 
downward within nearby vegetation or between rocks, rather than up and 
away as is usually observed with aquatic Hawaiian damselfly species. 
Although immature individuals have not been located, based on the 
habitat and the behavior of the adults, it is believed that the naiads 
may be terrestrial or semiterrestrial, occurring among damp leaflitter 
(Kennedy 1934, p. 345) or possibly within moist soil or seeps between 
boulders in suitable habitat (Preston 2007a). The highest elevation at 
which this species has been recorded is 3,000 feet (ft) (914 meters 
(m)), but its close association with uluhe habitat suggests that its 
range may extend upward to close to 4,000 ft (1,212 m) (Foote 2007).
    Historically, the flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly was known from 
the islands of Hawaii and Maui. On Hawaii, it was originally known from 
seven or more general localities. The species has not been seen on 
Hawaii for over 80 years, although extensive surveys within apparently 
suitable habitat in the Kau and Olaa areas were conducted from 1997 to 
2008 (Polhemus 2008). On Maui, the flying earwig damselfly was 
historically reported from five general locations on the windward side 
of the island (Kennedy 1934, p. 345). Since the 1930s, however, the 
flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly has only been observed in a single 
area along a particular stream on the windward side of east Maui, 
despite surveys from 1993 through 2008 at several of its historically 
occupied sites. Although presumed extant, the last observation of the 
species was in 2005 (Foote 2008); the species was not observed during 
the last survey at this location in 2008. No quantitative estimate of 
the size of this remaining population is available.
    It is hypothesized that the flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly may 
now be restricted to what is perhaps suboptimal habitat, where periodic 
absences of the species due to drought may be expected and might 
explain the lack of observations of the species (Foote 2007). Some 
researchers also believe that overcollection of this species by 
enthusiasts may have impacted some populations in the past (Polhemus 
2008). It is further possible that the individuals observed in this 
area are actually part of a larger population that may be located in 
the extensive belt of uluhe habitat located upslope, where the habitat 
is predominantly native shrubs and matted fern understory (Foote 2007; 
Hawaii Biodiversity and Mapping Program (HBMP) 2006). Unsurveyed areas 
containing potentially suitable habitat for this species include the 
Hana coast of east Maui, and the east rift zone of Kilauea and the Kona 
area on the island of Hawaii (Foote 2007).
Pacific Hawaiian Damselfly
    The Pacific Hawaiian damselfly was first described by McLachlan 
(1883, p. 234), based on specimens collected by R.C.L. Perkins from 
streams on the islands of Lanai and Maui. This damselfly is a 
relatively small, dark-colored species, with adults measuring 1.3 to 
1.4 in (34 to 37 mm) in length and having a wingspan of 1.3 to 1.6 in 
(33 to 42 mm). Both adult males and females are mostly black in color. 
Males exhibit brick-red striping and patterns, while females exhibit 
light-green striping and patterns. The only immature individuals of 
this species that have been collected were early-instar (an intermoult 
stage of development) individuals, and they exhibit flattened, leaf-
like gills (Polhemus and Asquith 1996, p. 83). This species is most 
easily distinguished from other Hawaiian damselflies by the extremely 
long lower abdominal appendages of the male, which greatly exceed the 
length of the upper appendages.
    Historically, the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly was known from lower 
elevations (below 2,000 ft (600 m)) on all of the main Hawaiian Islands 
except Kahoolawe and Niihau (Perkins 1899, p. 64). This species was 
known to breed primarily in lentic (standing water) systems such as 
marshes, seepage-fed pools, large ponds at higher elevations, and 
small, quiet pools in gulches that have been cut off from the main 
stream channel (Moore and Gagne 1982, p. 4; Polhemus and Asquith 1996, 
p. 83). The Pacific Hawaiian damselfly is no longer found in most 
lentic habitats in Hawaii, such as ponds and taro (Colocasia esculenta) 
fields, due to predation by nonnative fish that now occur in these 
systems (Moore and Gagne 1982, p. 4; Englund et al. 2007, p. 215). 
Observations have confirmed that the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly is now 
restricted almost exclusively to seepage-fed pools along overflow 
channels in the terminal reaches of perennial streams, usually in areas 
surrounded by thick vegetation (Moore and Gagne 1982, pp. 3-4; Polhemus 
1994, p. 54; Englund 1999, p. 236; Englund et al. 2007, p. 216; 
Polhemus 2007, p. 238). Adults usually do not stray far from the 
vicinity of the breeding pools, perching on bordering vegetation and 
flying only short distances when disturbed (Polhemus and Asquith 1996, 
p. 83). This species is rarely seen along main stream channels, and its 
ability to disperse long distances over land or water is suspected to 
be poor compared to other Hawaiian damselflies (Jordan et al. 2007, p. 
254).
    The Pacific Hawaiian damselfly is now believed to be extirpated 
from the islands of Oahu, Kauai, and Lanai (Polhemus and Asquith 1996, 
p. 83). On the island of Oahu, due to its occupation of particularly 
vulnerable habitat within sidepools of lowland streams, the Pacific 
Hawaiian damselfly was rare by the 1890s and appears to have been 
extirpated from this island by 1910 (Liebherr and Polhemus 1997, p. 
494). It is unknown when the Kauai and Lanai populations of the Pacific 
Hawaiian damselfly disappeared. Until 1998, it was believed that the 
species was extirpated from the island of Hawaii. That year, one 
population was discovered within a small stream located just above, but 
isolated from, Maili Stream, which is known to be occupied by nonnative 
fish (Englund 1998, pp. 15-16). On Maui and Molokai, fewer than six 
populations of the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly could be located by the 
1970s (Harwood 1976, pp. 251-253; Gagne 1980, pp. 119, 125; Moore and 
Gagne 1982, p. 1). The conservation of this species was identified as a 
priority by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and 
Natural Resources (Moore 1982, p. 209).
    The Pacific Hawaiian damselfly is currently found in at least seven 
streams on Molokai and may possibly be extant in other unsurveyed 
streams on Molokai's northern coast that have not been invaded by 
nonnative fish (Englund 2008). On the island of Maui, the species is 
currently known from 14 streams. The Pacific Hawaiian damselfly is no 
longer found along the entire reaches of these Maui streams, but only 
in restricted areas along each stream where steep terrain prevents 
access by nonnative fish, which inhabit degraded, lower stream reaches 
(Polhemus and Asquith 1996, p. 13; Englund et al. 2007, p. 215). The 
species is known from a single population on the island of Hawaii, last 
observed in 1998.
    No quantitative estimates of the size of the extant populations are 
available. Howarth (1991, p. 490) described the Pacific Hawaiian 
damselfly as the most common and most widespread of the native 
damselfly species at the end of the 19th century, and yet a decline in 
this species was observed as early as

[[Page 35993]]

1905 due to the effects of nonnative fish introduced for control of 
mosquitoes.

Summary of Comments and Recommendations

    In our proposed rule published on July 8, 2009 (74 FR 32490), we 
requested that all interested parties submit written comments on the 
proposal by September 8, 2009. We also contacted appropriate Federal 
and State agencies, scientific experts and organizations, and other 
interested parties and invited them to comment on the proposal. 
Newspaper notices inviting general public comment were published on the 
islands of Hawaii, Maui, Molokai, and Oahu. On November 19, 2009 (74 FR 
59956), we reopened the comment period for an additional 30 days, 
ending December 21, 2009.
    We received a total of five written comments and no requests for 
public hearings. Three comments were from State of Hawaii agencies and 
two were from the same nongovernmental organization. We received three 
comments supporting the listing of the two Hawaiian damselflies. Two 
comments neither supported nor opposed the listings, and one of these 
comments provided additional information on the two damselflies. We 
also requested peer review from potential peer reviewers.

Peer Review Comments

    In accordance with our peer review policy published on July 1, 1994 
(59 FR 34270), we solicited expert opinion from seven knowledgeable 
individuals with scientific expertise that included familiarity with 
the two Hawaiian damselflies and their habitat, biological needs, and 
threats. We received no written comments from any of the seven peer 
reviewers, although several offered their opinion that the two Hawaiian 
damselfly species meet the definition of an endangered species (A. 
Asquith, Hawaii Sea Grant, pers. comm. 2009; F. Howarth, Bishop Museum, 
pers. comm. 2009; K. Magnacca, University of Hawaii at Hilo, pers. 
comm. 2009; D. Polhemus, State of Hawaii Division of Aquatic Resources, 
pers. comm. 2009; D. Preston, Bishop Museum, pers. comm. 2009).

Comments from the State of Hawaii

    The State of Hawaii's State Historic Preservation Division 
concurred that no historic properties would be affected by the listing 
of the two Hawaiian damselflies (McMahon 2009, pers. comm.). The 
State's Division of Forestry and Wildlife (DOFAW) and Office of 
Hawaiian Affairs supported listing the two damselflies as endangered 
(Conry 2009, pers. comm.; Namu'o 2009, pers. comm.).

Public Comments

    (1) Comment: One commenter stated that there appears to be little, 
if any, empirical data indicating water diversions have any potential 
impact on the flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly.
    Our response: While we acknowledge that the larval stage of the 
flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly has never been observed within stream 
water, repeated observations of the adults along the stream adjacent to 
its only known population site on east Maui indicate a strong 
biological association of an unknown nature with flowing stream water. 
This association is likely related to the species' natural history and 
may include the need for sufficient space or a stream setting for 
mating adults and territorial behavior of males. Additionally, the 
species' larval habitat is undoubtedly dependent on localized area 
hydrology. For example, should a stream experience either reduced flow 
or complete dewatering for an extended period of time, it is expected 
that the impact to surrounding soils and associated vegetation, 
including the uluhe ferns that are believed to be the species' likely 
larval-stage habitat, will be soil desiccation and concomitant 
prolonged vegetation dieback, resulting in degraded habitat conditions 
for the flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly.
    (2) Comment: One commenter stated the reduction or modification of 
water flow in a stream should not be identified as an activity that 
could potentially result in violation of section 9 of the Act 
pertaining to the flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly.
    Our response: As discussed in the previous response (see Comment 
1), we believe there is a strong association with stream water flow and 
the species' life history requirements. Stream flow is likely essential 
to the adult damselfly's breeding requirements and is also essential to 
maintaining localized soil hydrology necessary for persistence of uluhe 
ferns, which are known foraging and mating sites for the adults and may 
provide habitat for the larval stage. Therefore, any permanent or 
prolonged reduction or modification of stream flow in a stream utilized 
by this species may result in a violation of section 9 of the Act.
    (3) Comment: One commenter stated that distribution of both species 
is not fully known and recommended that the Service conduct additional 
surveys for both species prior to proceeding with listing.
    Our response: In preparing both the proposed and final rules for 
these species, we reviewed the best scientific and commercial data 
available, including technical reports, published journal articles, and 
numerous other documents, including unpublished reports and surveys. In 
addition, we consulted with several species experts. We based our 
listing determination for the flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly and the 
Pacific Hawaiian damselfly on the best available information regarding 
the species' current known population status, the known condition of 
their habitat, and the current factors affecting the species, along 
with ongoing conservation efforts, as described in the Summary of 
Factors Affecting the Species (below) in this final rule. The Act 
neither provides for, nor requires, additional research effort prior to 
a listing decision. We acknowledge that uncertainties exist; however, 
under section 4 of the Act, we must make a listing determination based 
on the best scientific and commercial available at the time of our 
determination.
    (4) Comment: One commenter disagreed with our analysis that stream 
diversions for agriculture have reduced stream habitat available to the 
Pacific Hawaiian damselfly, and currently pose a threat to this 
species.
    Our response: Historically, the impacts of the plantation-era 
sugarcane irrigation system reduced stream habitat available to this 
species. The Pacific Hawaiian damselfly was once among the most 
commonly observed aquatic insects in the islands (Zimmerman 1948, p. 
377). Because this species breeds in lentic habitats or stream terminal 
reaches, which experienced significant modification for agriculture 
beginning as early as the 19th century, the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly 
was extirpated from many of its historical habitat sites (Polhemus 
2007, p. 236). By the 1930s, water diversions had been developed on all 
of the main Hawaiian Islands, and by 1978, the stream flow in over one-
half of all of the 366 perennial streams in Hawaii had been altered in 
some manner (Brasher 2003, p. 1055). All or most of the low or average 
flow of the stream was, and often still is, diverted into fields or 
reservoirs, leaving many stream channels completely dry (Takasaki et 
al. 1969, pp. 27-28; Harris et al. 1993, p. 12; Wilcox 1996, p. 56).
    With the nearly complete cessation of this industry in the Hawaiian 
Islands, it is unlikely that new irrigation-related water diversion 
activities will be initiated in the remaining streams that currently 
provide habitat for the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly. However, most of 
the historical water diversions remain in

[[Page 35994]]

place. The historical loss of stream habitat, resulting in the present 
curtailment of habitat available to the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly, 
combined with the threat of predation by nonnative fish in the 
remaining stream habitat, continues to restrict and reduce the amount 
of habitat potentially available to this species. Should some of this 
water be returned to stream systems, the amount of habitat available to 
this species may increase if the water return were to be implemented 
carefully to prevent the spread of nonnative fish species upstream.
    (5) Comment: One commenter noted the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly, 
although historically known from lower elevations, is now known to have 
established successfully breeding populations at higher elevations 
above existing stream diversions.
    Our response: Prior to the establishment of widespread stream 
diversions, the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly was considered one of the 
most abundant and frequently observed insects in Hawaii and was known 
from all of the main Hawaiian Islands, except Kahoolawe and Niihau. 
Previously known from suitable portions of many streams and water 
bodies from sea level to some higher elevation sites (Zimmerman 1948, 
p. 377), the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly is now extirpated from at least 
18 known population sites on the islands of Hawaii, Kauai, Lanai, Oahu, 
Maui, and Molokai. Diversions changed the amount and flow rate of water 
within many lower stream sections, because the diversions either 
reduced the amount of water flow at the point of diversion, or captured 
all stream water (as they were designed to do) during times of drier 
weather or drought. The Pacific Hawaiian damselfly is currently found 
in approximately 22 streams on the islands of Hawaii, Maui, and 
Molokai, across a variety of elevations. All known populations are 
located within streams or bodies of water free of nonnative, predatory 
fish. We lack sufficient information to determine whether all stream 
reaches occupied by this damselfly species are now above manmade 
diversions, but we know the species is largely absent from areas below 
manmade diversions.
    (6) Comment: One commenter stated that the current known range of 
the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly appears to be broader than the species' 
known range at the time it became a candidate for listing.
    Our response: We acknowledged in our proposed rule that at the time 
we determined we had sufficient information on file to support a 
proposal to list the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly (1984), and elevated it 
to candidate status, it had been extirpated from Kauai, Oahu, and 
Lanai, and was also considered extirpated from the island of Hawaii. 
Subsequently in 1998, a single population was discovered on an isolated 
portion of a Hilo stream on the island of Hawaii. However, since then, 
the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly has not been reobserved on Kauai, Lanai, 
or Oahu, and remains only on Molokai and Maui, and one location on 
Hawaii Island. We do not consider the discovery of a single population 
on the island of Hawaii to represent a significant broadening of the 
range of the species.
    (7) Comment: One commenter observed that water diversions may 
enhance the damselflies' chances for survival by isolating them from 
predatory, nonnative fish species.
    Our response: We agree that existing diversions on some streams 
function as a manmade barrier and prevent the egress of nonnative, 
predatory fish into currently isolated, upstream damselfly habitat 
sites. However, existing diversions also alter the historical amount 
and flow rate of water within many lower stream sections because the 
diversions either reduce the amount of water flow at the point of 
diversion or capture all stream water during times of drier weather or 
drought. Therefore, the net impact of stream diversions in the Hawaiian 
Islands has been and continues to be an overall reduction in the amount 
of suitable stream habitat available to both the Pacific Hawaiian 
damselfly and the flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly.
    (8) Comment: One commenter noted that the recently mandated interim 
in-stream flow standards (IIFS) established by the Commission for Water 
Resource Management (CWRM) for 10 east Maui streams diverted by the 
East Maui Irrigation Company (EMI) may either benefit existing 
damselfly populations or allow entry of nonnative fish species into 
currently fish-isolated damselfly habitat. The commenter further stated 
that the proposed rule incorrectly identifies the 1988 IIFS as current 
while newer standards have been mandated.
    Our response: We agree that the potential release of additional 
water into streams that are currently being diverted is a complex 
issue, and that the outcome may be beneficial to damselflies or may 
increase the threat from nonnative predatory fish. As of the date of 
publication of this final rule, it is our understanding that the 
recently proposed IIFS have yet to be approved and implemented by the 
CWRM, and we therefore recognize the 1988 standards as current. Because 
the new standards have not yet been implemented, we are unable to 
determine their effectiveness in enhancing damselfly habitat.
    Should the proposed IIFS be approved as the new standard, we will 
strongly support a collaborative conservation effort between our 
agency; the State; the CWRM; and affected landowners, leaseholders, and 
other entities, to analyze the potential return of water flow into 
currently diverted streams on a case-by-case basis, to ensure the 
protection of the Pacific Hawaiian and the flying earwig Hawaiian 
damselflies and their stream or stream-associated habitat.
    (9) Comment: One commenter disagreed with our assessment that the 
damselflies were threatened by inadequate regulatory protections. The 
commenter stated that the State Water Code requires that the economic 
benefits of stream water removal be balanced against in-stream 
benefits, including benefits to aquatic fish and wildlife. The 
commenter further stated that the CWRM's IIFS standards provide 
adequate protection for aquatic wildlife, and the CWRM has, in the 
past, given considerable deference to in-stream benefits over stream 
water removal in setting IIFS.
    Our response: We believe that the CWRM's stated requirements to 
provide protection for aquatic wildlife are insufficiently specific to 
adequately protect the damselflies or their habitat. The CWRM's IIFS 
standards do not include provisions that address the needs of the 
species. Additionally, we lack specific examples of past CWRM deference 
to in-stream benefits, and are thus unable to determine whether CWRM's 
IIFS standards have specifically benefited these damselflies.
    (10) Comment: One commenter explained that several of the State's 
existing hydroelectric plants do not operate directly on streams but 
are located some distance away and are powered by water diverted from 
streams.
    Our response: In this final rule, we have clarified that water is 
diverted to power hydroelectric facilities regardless of their 
location.
    (11) Comment: One commenter noted that some of the hydroelectric 
projects identified as proposed may be developed without diverting 
additional water from streams.
    Our response: We have modified the appropriate section of this 
final rule to clarify that in some cases, for some of the State's 
proposed hydroelectric facilities, no additional water might be 
diverted beyond what is currently removed for agriculture or other

[[Page 35995]]

purposes. However, the threats to the damselflies below the point of 
diversion within a given stream remain the same due to the existing 
diversion, and we believe that any additional increased water diversion 
for hydroelectric power could possibly impact damselfly populations.
    (12) Comment: One commenter noted that water currently being 
diverted from streams to generate power for some hydroelectric projects 
is often returned downstream within the same stream system. Therefore, 
the potential to impact damselfly habitat will vary depending on 
location of the diversion and location of damselfly habitat within the 
respective stream system.
    Our response: We have modified the appropriate section of this 
final rule to clarify that, in some streams, water diverted for the 
generation of power is returned to the same stream system. However, the 
threats to the damselflies below the point of diversion remain, and may 
depend upon the difference (if any) of the volume and quality of water 
returned and the point at which the water is returned to the stream 
system. The commenter did not provide specific examples or elaborate 
upon specific streams.
    (13) Comment: One commenter clarified that the Hawaii Stream 
Assessment (HSA) (CWRM 1990) identifies 28, not 38, sites that have 
potential to be developed for hydropower. The commenter further noted 
that these sites have not been proposed for development, but rather 
that the sites have been identified as economically developable for 
hydroelectric use. Populations of the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly are 
located upon three of these streams identified only as potentially 
economically developable for hydroelectric use.
    Our response: We have modified the appropriate section of this 
final rule to correct the information that 28, not 38, sites have been 
identified as potentially economically developable for hydroelectric 
use and that three of the streams harboring Pacific Hawaiian damselfly 
populations are not proposed for development but rather are identified 
as only potentially developable.
    (14) Comment: One commenter observed that the HSA identifies 10 
sites where hydropower developments have been proposed, several of 
which overlap with sites identified as potentially developable (see 
Comment 13). The commenter further noted that the list of 10 sites 
actually proposed for hydroelectric development does not include 
streams known to be occupied by the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly; 
therefore, future hydropower development is unlikely to impact this 
species. However, one proposed site does include the only known 
population of the flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly.
    Our response: We have modified the appropriate section of this 
final rule to clarify that some of the 10 sites proposed for 
development in the HSA overlap with those sites identified as 
economically developable, and that none of the 10 proposed sites 
includes streams with Pacific Hawaiian damselfly populations. We have 
added the information regarding the proposed hydroelectric development 
on the stream site associated with the only known location of the 
flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly to our threats analysis (see Factor 
A).

Summary of Factors Affecting the Species

    Section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and its implementing 
regulations (50 CFR part 424) set forth the procedures for adding 
species to the Federal Lists of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and 
Plants. A species may be determined to be an endangered or threatened 
species due to one or more of the five factors described in section 
4(a)(1) of the Act. These five listing factors are: (A) The present or 
threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or 
range; (B) overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or 
educational purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of 
existing regulatory mechanisms; and (E) other natural or manmade 
factors affecting its continued existence. Listing actions may be 
warranted based on any of the above threat factors, singly or in 
combination.
    The threats to the flying earwig and Pacific Hawaiian damselfly 
species are summarized according to the five listing factors in Table 
1, and discussed in detail below.

      TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF THREATS TO THE FLYING EARWING HAWAIIAN DAMSELFLY AND PACIFIC HAWAIIAN DAMSELFLY.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     SPECIES
                                                               -------------------------------------------------
         5 FACTORS  CATEGORY                   THREATS          Flying Earwig  Hawaiian      Pacific Hawaiian
                                                                       Damselfly                Damselfly
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FACTOR A                               Agriculture/urban        X                        X
                                        development
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Stream alteration        P                        X
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Habitat modification by  X                        --
                                        pigs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Habitat modification by  X                        X
                                        nonnative plants
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Stochastic events        X                        X
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Climate change           P                        P
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FACTOR B                               Overcollection           P                        --
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FACTOR C                               Predation                A, BF (P)                A, B, F, BF
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FACTOR D                               Inadequate habitat       X                        X
                                        protection
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Inadequate protection    X                        X
                                        from nonnative aquatic
                                        species
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FACTOR E                               Limited populations      X                        X
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A = ants

[[Page 35996]]

 
B = backswimmers
F = fish
BF = bullfrogs
P = potential threat
X = known threat

Factor A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or 
Curtailment of Its Habitat or Range

    Freshwater habitats used by the flying earwig and Pacific Hawaiian 
damselflies on all of the main Hawaiian Islands are severely altered 
and degraded because of past and present land and water management 
practices, including: agriculture and urban development; development of 
groundwater, perched aquifer (aquifer sitting above main water table), 
and surface water resources; and the deliberate and accidental 
introductions of nonnative animals (Harris et al. 1993, pp. 12-13; 
Meier et al. 1993, pp. 181-183).
Habitat Destruction and Modification by Agriculture and Urban 
Development
    Although there has not been a comprehensive, site-by-site 
assessment of wetland loss in Hawaii (Erikson and Puttock 2006, p. 40), 
Dahl (1990, p. 7) estimated that at least 12 percent of lowland to 
upper-elevation wetlands in Hawaii had been converted to non-wetland 
habitat by the 1980s. If only coastal plain (below 1,000 ft (305 m) 
elevation) wetlands are considered, it is estimated that 30 percent 
have been converted for agricultural and urban development (Kosaka 
l990, p. 1). These marshlands and wetlands provided habitat for several 
damselfly species, including the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly.
    By the 1930s, water diversions had been developed on all of the 
main Hawaiian Islands, and by 1978, the stream flow in over one-half of 
all of the 366 perennial streams in Hawaii had been altered in some 
manner (Brasher 2003, p. 1055). All or most of the low or average flow 
of the stream was, and often still is, diverted into fields or 
reservoirs, leaving many stream channels completely dry (Takasaki et 
al. 1969, pp. 27-28; Harris et al. 1993, p. 12; Wilcox 1996, p. 56). 
The historical destruction and modification of habitat continues to 
impact the two Hawaiian damselflies, by restricting them to curtailed 
or isolated habitat areas that are often degraded in quality (for 
example, by the presence of predatory nonnative fishes). The present 
curtailment of the habitat or range of the flying earwig Hawaiian 
damselfly and Pacific Hawaiian damselfly due to past habitat 
destruction or modification in turn limits population size, 
distribution, and connectivity, resulting in an increased probability 
of local extirpation or even extinction of the two Hawaiian damselfly 
species.
    Although extensive filling of freshwater wetlands is rarely 
permitted today, loss of riparian or wetland habitats utilized by the 
Pacific and flying earwig Hawaiian damselflies, such as smaller areas 
of moist slopes, emergent vegetation, and narrow strips of freshwater 
seeps within anchialine pool complexes (landlocked bodies of water with 
a subterranean connection to the ocean), still occurs. In addition, 
marshes have been, and continue to be, slowly filled and converted to 
meadow habitat due to increased sedimentation resulting from increased 
storm water runoff from upslope development, the accumulation of 
uncontrolled growth of invasive vegetation, and blockage of downslope 
drainage (Wilson Okamoto & Associates, Inc. 1993, pp. 3-4 to 3-5).
    The effects of future conversion of wetland and other aquatic 
habitat for agriculture and urban development are immediate and 
significant for the following reason: As noted above, an estimated 30 
percent of all coastal plain wetlands in Hawaii have already been lost 
to agriculture and urban development, while the loss of lowland 
freshwater habitat in Hawaii already approaches 80 to 90 percent 
(Kosaka 1990, p. 1). Lacking the aquatic habitat features that the 
damselflies require for essential life history needs, such as marshes, 
ponds, and sidepools along streams (Pacific Hawaiian damselfly) and 
riparian habitat (flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly), these modified 
areas no longer support populations of these two Hawaiian damselflies. 
Agriculture and urban development have thus contributed to the present 
curtailment of the habitat of these two Hawaiian damselflies, and we 
have no indication that this threat is likely to be significantly 
ameliorated in the foreseeable future.
Habitat Destruction and Modification by Stream Diversion
    Stream modifications began with the early Hawaiians, who diverted 
water to irrigate taro. However, unlike modern stream diversions which 
often completely dewater streams all year around, early diversions 
often took no more than half the stream flow, and typically were 
periodic to occasionally flood taro ponds at different times through 
the year, rather than continuously flood them (Handy and Handy 1972, 
pp. 58-59). The advent of plantation sugarcane cultivation led to far 
more extensive stream diversions, with the first diversion built in 
1856 on Kauai (Wilcox 1996, p. 54). These systems were designed to tap 
water at upper elevations (above 984 ft (300 m)) by means of a concrete 
weir in the stream (Wilcox 1996, p. 54). All or most of the low or 
average flow of the stream was, and often still is, diverted into 
fields or reservoirs, leaving many stream channels completely dry 
(Takasaki et al. 1969, pp. 27-28; Harris et al. 1993, p. 12; Wilcox 
1996, p. 56).
    As noted above, by the 1930s, water diversions had been developed 
on all of the main Hawaiian Islands, and by 1978, the stream flow in 
over one-half of all of the 366 perennial streams in Hawaii had been 
altered in some manner (Brasher 2003, p. 1055). Some stream diversion 
systems are extensive, such as the Waiahole Ditch, which diverts water 
from 37 streams within the range of the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly on 
the windward side of Oahu to the dry plains on the leeward side of the 
island via a tunnel cut through the Koolau mountain range (Stearns and 
Vaksvik 1935, pp. 399-403). On west Maui, as of 1978, over 49 miles 
(mi) (78 kilometers (km)) of stream habitat in 12 streams had been lost 
due to diversions, and all of the 17 perennial streams on west Maui are 
dewatered to some extent (Maciolek 1979, p. 605). This loss of stream 
habitat may have contributed to the extirpation of the Pacific Hawaiian 
damselfly population on west Maui. Given the affiliation of the flying 
earwig Hawaiian damselfly with riparian habitats, this loss of stream 
habitat may also potentially account for its absence on west Maui. Most 
lower-elevation stream segments on west Maui are now completely dry, 
except during storm-influenced flows (Maciolek 1979, p. 605).
    The maintenance of natural hydrology is closely tied to the life 
history requirements of the Hawaiian damselflies, as the presence of 
standing or running water is essential to reproduction of the two 
species. In addition to providing breeding habitat for the adults, the 
aquatic larval stage of the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly is entirely 
dependent on water, and the maintenance of local soil hydrology is 
necessary for the persistence of uluhe

[[Page 35997]]

ferns, which provide habitat for the larval stage of the flying earwig 
Hawaiian damselfly. The reduced flow or complete dewatering of streams 
thus results in the destruction or degradation of habitat conditions 
for both the Pacific and flying earwig Hawaiian damselflies. The 
extensive diversion of streams on Maui island-wide has reduced the 
amount of stream habitat available to the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly, 
and potentially to the flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly as well.
    In addition to diverting water for agriculture and domestic water 
supply, streams in Hawaii have also been diverted for use in 
hydroelectric power. In some cases, the water used for power generation 
is already being diverted for another use; in other cases the water is 
returned to the stream of origin. There are a total of 18 active 
hydroelectric plants operating on Hawaiian streams on the islands of 
Hawaii, Kauai, and Maui, only one of which is located on a stream where 
a historical population of the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly was known on 
Kauai (Waimea). Another 28 sites have been identified as feasible for 
hydroelectric development on the islands of Hawaii, Kauai, Maui, and 
Molokai (Hawaii Stream Assessment 1990, pp. xxi, 96-97). Three of the 
sites identified as developable include current populations of the 
Pacific Hawaiian damselfly. A total of 10 streams have actually been 
proposed for development, with some overlap between the 28 streams 
identified as feasible. Notably, the stream adjacent to the single 
current remaining population site for the flying earwig Hawaiian 
damselfly on Maui is included among those proposed for hydroelectric 
development. Any additional diversion of stream flow for use in 
hydroelectric power could contribute to further loss of stream habitat 
for the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly and for the flying earwig Hawaiian 
damselfly.
Habitat Modification and Destruction by Dewatering of Aquifers
    In addition to the diversion of stream water and the resultant 
downstream dewatering, many streams in Hawaii have experienced reduced 
or zero surface flow as a result of the dewatering of their source 
aquifers. Often these aquifers, which previously fed the streams, were 
tapped by tunneling or the injudicious placement of wells (Stearns and 
Vaksvik 1935, pp. 386-434; Stearns 1985, pp. 291-305). These 
groundwater sources were captured for both domestic and agricultural 
use and in some areas have completely depleted nearby stream and spring 
flows. For example, the Waikolu Stream on Molokai has reduced flow due 
in part to groundwater withdrawal (Brasher 2003, p. 1,056), which may 
have reduced stream habitat available to the Pacific Hawaiian 
damselfly. Likewise, on Maui, streams in the west Maui Mountains that 
flow into the Lahaina District are fed by groundwater leaking from 
breached high-elevation dikes. Downstream of the dike compartments, 
stream diversions are designed to capture all of the low stream flow, 
causing the streams downstream to be frequently dry (U.S. Geological 
Survey 2008a, p. 1), likely impacting available habitat for the Pacific 
Hawaiian damselfly, and potentially for the flying earwig Hawaiian 
damselfly, in the Honolua and Honokohau streams.
    The island of Lanai lies within the rain shadow of the west Maui 
Mountains, which reach 5,788 ft (1,764 m) in elevation. Lower in 
elevation than Maui, annual rainfall on Lanai's summit is 30 to 40 in 
(760 to 1,015 mm), but is much less over the rest of the island 
(University of Hawaii Department of Geography 1998, p. 13). Flows of 
almost every spring and seep on Lanai have been diverted (Stearns 1940, 
pp. 73-74, 85, 88, 95). Surface waters in streams have also been 
diverted by tunnels in stream beds. Historically, Maunalei Stream was 
the only perennial stream on Lanai, and Hawaiians constructed taro loi 
(ponds for cultivation of taro) in the lower portions of this stream 
system. In 1911, a tunnel was constructed at 1,100 ft (330 m) elevation 
that undercuts the stream bed, diverting both the surface and 
subsurface flows and dewatering the stream from this point to its mouth 
(Stearns 1940, pp. 86-88). The Pacific Hawaiian damselfly, which 
depends on stream habitat, was historically known from Lanai but is no 
longer extant on this island. The Pacific Hawaiian damselfly was most 
likely impacted by the dewatering of this stream because it was the 
only permanent stream on Lanai prior to its dewatering. This example of 
the negative impact of dewatering leads us to conclude that dewatering 
poses a threat to the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly and the flying earwig 
Hawaiian damselfly on the remaining islands where the species persist.
Habitat Modification and Destruction by Vertical Wells
    Surface flow of streams has also been affected by vertical wells 
drilled in the past, because the basal aquifer (lowest groundwater 
layer) and alluvial caprock (sediment-deposited harder rock layer) 
through which the lower sections of streams flow can be pierced and 
hydraulically connected by wells (Stearns 1940, p. 88). This allows 
water in aquifers normally feeding the stream to be diverted elsewhere 
underground. Dewatering of the streams by tunneling and earlier, less-
informed well placement near or in streams was a significant cause of 
habitat loss, and these effects continue today. Historically, for 
example, there was sufficient surface flow in Makaha and Nanakuli 
streams on Oahu to support taro loi in their lower reaches, but this 
flow disappeared subsequent to construction of vertical wells upstream 
(Devick 1995, p. 1). The inadvertent dewatering of streams through the 
piercing of their aquifers (which are normally separated from adjacent 
water-bearing layers by an impermeable layer), by tunneling or through 
placement of vertical wells, caused the loss of Pacific Hawaiian 
damselfly habitat, and contributed to the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly's 
extirpation on the islands of Oahu, Kauai, and Lanai (Polhemus and 
Asquith 1996, pp. 23-24). Such activities also reduced the extent of 
stream habitat for the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly on the islands of 
Maui, Molokai, and Hawaii. Most lower-elevation stream segments on west 
Maui and leeward east Maui are now completely dry, except during storm-
influenced flows (Maciolek 1979, p. 605). The flow of nearly every seep 
and spring on Lanai has been captured or bored with wells (Stearns 
1940, pp. 73-74, 85, 88, 95). The inadvertent drying of streams from 
earlier, uninformed well placement and other activities has contributed 
to the decline of the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly by reducing its 
habitat on all of the islands from which it was historically known. It 
should be noted that the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly was once among the 
most commonly observed aquatic insects in the islands (Howarth 1991, p. 
40). The dewatering of streams on Maui and Hawaii may also have 
impacted habitat of the flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly.
    Although the State of Hawaii's Commission on Water Resource 
Management is now more cognizant of the effects that groundwater 
removal has on streams via injudicious placement of wells, the 
Commission still routinely reviews new permit applications for wells 
(Hardy 2009, p. 1). Thus, the potential for additional well-drilling 
continues to be a threat (see further discussion under Factor D, The 
Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms, below), and the ongoing 
effects of previously constructed vertical wells continue to be an 
ongoing threat to the Hawaiian dragonflies.

[[Page 35998]]

Habitat Modification and Destruction by Channelization
    In addition to the destruction of most of the stream habitat of the 
Pacific Hawaiian damselfly and the flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly, 
much of the remaining stream habitat has been, and continues to be, 
seriously degraded throughout the Hawaiian Islands. Stream degradation 
has been particularly severe on the island of Oahu where, by 1978, 58 
percent of all the perennial streams had been channelized (lined, 
partially lined, or altered) to control flooding (Brasher 2003, p. 
1055; Polhemus and Asquith 1996, p. 24), and 89 percent of the total 
length of these streams had been channelized (Parrish et al. 1984, p. 
83). The channelization of streams creates artificial, wide-bottomed 
stream beds and often results in removal of riparian vegetation, 
increased substrate homogeneity, increased temporal water velocity 
(increased water flow speed during times of higher precipitation, 
including minor and major flooding), increased illumination, and higher 
water temperatures (Parrish et al. 1984, p. 83; Brasher 2003, p. 1052). 
Natural streams meander and are lined with rocks, trees, and natural 
debris, and during times of flooding, jump their banks. Channelized 
streams are straightened and often lack natural obstructions, and 
during times of higher precipitation or flooding, facilitate a higher 
water flow velocity. Hawaiian damselflies are largely absent from 
channelized portions of streams (Polhemus and Asquith 1996, p. 24). In 
contrast, undisturbed Hawaiian stream systems exhibit a greater amount 
of riffle habitat, canopy closure, higher consistent flow velocity, and 
lower water temperatures that are characteristic of streams to which 
the Hawaiian damselflies, in general, are adapted (Brasher 2003, pp. 
1054-1057).
    Channelization of streams has not been restricted to lower stream 
reaches. For example, there is extensive channelization of the Kalihi 
Stream, on the island of Oahu, above 1,000-ft (300-m) elevation. 
Extensive stream channelization has contributed to the extirpation of 
the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly on Oahu (Englund 1999, p. 236; Polhemus 
2008, pp. 45-46).
    Stream diversion, channelization, and dewatering represent 
significant and immediate threats to the Pacific Hawaiian damselfly for 
the following reasons: (1) They reduce the amount and distribution of 
stream habitat available to this species; (2) they reduce stream flow, 
leaving lower elevation stream segments completely dry except during 
storms, or leaving many streams completely dry year-round, thus 
reducing or eliminating stream habitat; and (3) they indirectly lead to 
an increase in water temperature that leads to the loss of Pacific 
Hawaiian damselfly naiads due to direct physiological stress. Because 
the probability of species extinction increases when ranges are 
restricted, habitat decreases, and population numbers decline, the 
Pacific Hawaiian damselfly is particularly vulnerable to extinction due 
to such changes in its stream habitats.
    In addition, stream diversion, dewatering, and vertical wells have 
the potential to negatively impact, and in some cases may have 
impacted, the flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly. Stream flow is 
essential to the adult flying earwig damselfly's breeding requirements 
and is also essential to maintaining localized soil hydrology necessary 
for persistence of uluhe ferns, which are known foraging and mating 
sites for the adults and may provide habitat for the larval stage. 
Should the species' population site stream experience either reduced 
flow or complete dewatering for an extended period of time, it is 
expected that the impact to surrounding soils and associated 
vegetation, including the uluhe ferns that are believed to be the 
species' likely larval-stage habitat, will be soil desiccation and 
prolonged vegetation dieback, respectively.
Habitat Destruction and Modification by Feral Pigs
    One of the primary threats to the flying earwig Hawaiian damselfly 
is the ongoing destruction and degradation of its riparian habitat by 
nonnative animals, particularly feral pigs (Sus scrofa) (Polhemus and 
Asquith 1996, p. 22; Erickson and Puttock 2006, p. 42). Pigs of Asian 
descent were first introduced to Hawaii by the Polynesian ancestors of 
Hawaiians around 400 A.D. (Kirch 1982, pp. 3-4). Western immigrants, 
beginning with Captain Cook in 1778, repeatedly introduced European 
strains (Tomich 1986, pp. 120-121). The pigs escaped domestication and 
successfully invaded all areas, including wet and mesic forests and 
grasslands, on all of the main Hawaiian Islands.
    High pig densities and expansion of their distribution have caused 
indisputable widespread damage to native vegetation on the Hawaiian 
Islands (Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 63). Feral pigs create open areas 
within forest habitat by digging up, eating, and trampling native plant 
species (Stone 1985, p. 263). These open areas become fertile ground 
for nonnative plant seeds spread through the excrement of the pigs and 
by transport in their hair (Stone 1985, p. 263). In nitrogen-poor 
soils, feral pig excrement increases nutrient availability, enhancing 
establishment of nonnative weeds that are more adapted to richer soils 
than are native plants (Cuddihy and Stone 1990, p. 65). In this manner, 
largely nonnative forests replace native forest habitat (Cuddihy and 
Stone 1990, p. 65). In addition, feral pigs will root and dig for plant 
tubers and worms in wetlands, including marshes, on all of the main 
Hawaiian Islands (Erikson and Puttock 2006, p. 42).
    In a study conducted in the 1980s on feral pig populations in 
Kipahulu Valley on Maui, the deleterious effects of feral pig rooting 
on native forest ecosystems was documented (Diong 1982, pp. 150, 160-
167). Rooting by feral pigs was observed to be related to the search 
for earthworms, with rooting depths averaging 8 in (20 cm), and rooting 
was found to greatly disrupt the leaf litter and topsoil layers, and 
contribute to erosion and changes in ground topography. The feeding 
habits of pigs were observed to create seed beds, enabling the 
establishment and spread of invasive weedy species such as Clidemia 
hirta (Koster's curse). The study concluded that all aspects of the 
feeding habits of pigs are damaging to the structure and function of 
the Hawaiian forest ecosystem (Diong 1982, pp. 160-167).
    It is likely that pigs similarly impact the native vegetation used 
for perching by adult flying earwig Hawaiian damselflies. On Maui, 
feral pigs inhabit the uluhe-dominated riparian habitat of the flying 
earwig Hawaiian damselfly. Thro